A comparison of five multi attribute utility instruments

Abstract

Abstract This paper presents the results of the validation study carried out to evaluate the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) Instrument for the measurement of health related quality of life and utility. It involves, inter alia, the largest comparison of utility instruments that has been carried out to date. The five instruments included in the study are the AQoL, the Canadian HUI III, the Finnish 15D, the EuroQoL (EQ5D) and the SF36 with UK utility weights as quantified by Brazier (1998). The paper compares: (i) the absolute utility score obtained by different sub-populations; (ii) instrument sensitivity; (iii) the incremental differences in utility between different health states; (iv) the structural properties of descriptive systems; and (v) a limited comparison with a Time Trade-Off (TTO) assessment of own health by individuals. Using these criteria the AQoL performs very well. Its predicted utilities are very similar to those obtained from the HUI. There is evidence that the AQoL has greater sensitivity to health states than other instruments and its psychometric properties, as usually judged, are excellent. Despite this, it is concluded that, at present, no single MAU system can claim to be the gold standard and that researchers should select an instrument that is sensitive to the health states which they are investigating and that caution should be exercised in treating any of the instrument results as representing a utility score which truly represents a trade-off between life and health related quality of life.